While plans for a six-story building to rise up to 65 feet in height upon the Happy Chinese Restaurant site at 1324-1326 Powell Street were in the works, said plans were subsequently abandoned. And bigger plans for an eight-story building to rise up to 84 feet in height upon the Chinatown site were drawn.

As drafted by AXIS/GFA Architecture and Design and slated to be approved in two weeks time, the new set of plans would yield 24 residential units, a mix of 11 studios, 7 one-bedrooms, 4 twos and 2 threes, with a basement storage room for 24 bikes; 3,400 square feet of ground floor commercial space; and a 627-square-foot open space on the building’s eighth floor for the building’s residents, leveraging California’s Density Bonus Law for the additional height and density as proposed.

We’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.

Comments from Plugged-In Readers

  1. Posted by maurice

    Ugly, but dense! Happy to see this not have any car parking.

    • Posted by DK

      Do you consider it pretty now?

      • Posted by Fishchum

        Caught your hand inside the till
        Slammed your fingers in the drawer
        Fought with kitchen knives and skewers
        Dressed me up in women’s clothes
        Messed around with gender roles
        Line my eyes and call me pretty

        • Posted by Ohlone Californio

          Tune. A real 2nd tier Manchester rock n roll belter, that one.

          • Posted by Fishchum

            Saw James play Stern Grove a couple of years ago as an opening act for The Psychedelic Furs.

  2. Posted by Vance Chan

    Come on, if you want to presumably charge market pricing you have to offer some parking. Rich people do not like to only uber everywhere.

    • Posted by Mark

      They can take the Central Subway! LMAO.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      If the developer thinks they attract occupants who don’t need on-site parking, then let them build it.

    • Posted by Patrick Siegman

      In San Francisco, 31% of all households do not own a motor vehicle. That’s why there’s a large market for car-free homes like these modest apartments.

      For those who choose to own an automobile, the city has many other apartment buildings with surplus parking.

      In the event that someone who owns a car decides that they want to live in this particular building, there is plenty of parking for rent nearby. For example, the City-owned North Beach Garage, located 400 feet north of this site, offers spaces for $360 per month.

      There are many other options available to folks who prefer a building without on-site parking. Some drivers buy or rent apartments in car-free buildings because their employer provides free parking at work. Others use carshare vehicles for the occasions when they want to drive.

      Living in a car-free building may not be your particular cup of tea. But many San Franciscans prefer it. They like the savings on rents and home prices that they gain by choosing car-free buildings. If you shop around, you’ll notice that those savings are substantial.

  3. Posted by RySF

    What could be better than paying market rate pricing, no parking, commuting on a yet-to-be-completed subway to nowhere, AND living with SFFD fire sirens at all hours of the day and night.

    • Posted by The Milkshake of Despair

      This place is a mere 15 minute walk to California’s densest cluster of jobs.

    • Posted by Dixon Hill

      That “subway to nowhere” is part of the entire MUNI Metro system and and ties to BART. It will likely be completed by the time this project is delivered.

      Fair point about the fire station but you could say the same thing about the planned project atop the fire station on Sansome Street.

  4. Posted by notcom

    Finally…Some density in Chinatown!!!

  5. Posted by CalCulver

    Hopefully, that is just a REALLY bad visual representation. So ugly and uninspired. Simply horrible design, dull and looks so out of place for SF.

    • Posted by Brian M

      It actually looks very typical for a small midrise built in any decade after WWII. You must view the vast majority of sf streets with rose-colored glasses

      • Posted by CalCulver

        No need for a personal attack. Just my opinion on this proposed structure.

        • Posted by SF Native

          No, you are correct, this looks terrible. No respect for San Francisco.

  6. Posted by unlivablecity

    That building looks like a filthy sticky crusty clump of lego’s just pulled out from under the back seat. Wow.

    • Posted by SFRealist

      Do you mean the old building or the new building?

      • Posted by unlivablecity

        Nowhere can i find the age of the building but it looks gold rush era. It’s owned by a trust belonging to one Mahmoud Larizadeh.

        • Posted by Chris

          Since most of Chinatown burned in the 1906 fire, I doubt it is from the gold rush era.

        • Posted by Notcom

          Not sure where you looked , but a 5-second, 1-click search told me “1907”…which meshes pretty well w/ Chris’ observation.

      • Posted by SF Native

        Yuck. Why do these builders want to ruin San Francisco. Any new building in SF should be required not to look horrible. A low bar. This area probably does not need parking.

  7. Posted by Bluntcard

    As a historic homage, the burgundy should be mint.

Comments are closed.

Recent Articles